That depends on noticing the usually overlooked distinction between color and culture, race and ethnicity, and most of all on who we are (or, as Clinton would say, the definition of “us”).

The estimable Stanley Crouch raises these issues in an impressive short essay, here. (HatTip to RealClearPolitics)

If Barack Obama makes it all the way to becoming the Democratic nominee for President in 2008, a feat he says he may attempt, a much more complex understanding of the difference between color and ethnic identity will be upon us for the very first time.

….

After all, Obama’s mother is of white U.S. stock. His father is a black Kenyan. Other than color, Obama did not — does not — share a heritage with the majority of black Americans, who are descendants of plantation slaves.

….

So when black Americans refer to Obama as “one of us,” I do not know what they are talking about. In his new book, “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama makes it clear that, while he has experienced some light versions of typical racial stereotypes, he cannot claim those problems as his own — nor has he lived the life of a black American.

Does this matter? As Crouch says, probably not. What Crouch almost but does not quite say is that even being “descendants of plantation slaves” no longer means as much as it used to. He came close when he noted that Alan Keyes, who was stupidly imported to Illinois to run against Obama in 2004, “was unable to draw a meaningful distinction between himself as a black American and Obama as an African-American,” which was not surprising “since it was obvious that Keyes came from the Southeast, not the Midwest.”

One of the many tragedies of our current “diversity” mania is that it perpetuates the notion that color, culture, and identity are identical.

Say What? (4)

To the lefty, human beings are fungible within the assigned classifications. A black is a black, Asian Asian, etc. So a Brazilian burglar from the slums of Sao Paolo has an identical diversometer reading with a dentist from Sonora. Everybody knows that group membership is THE thing that matters.

>>>”So when black Americans refer to Obama as “one of us,” I do not know what they are talking about. In his new book, “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama makes it clear that, while he has experienced some light versions of typical racial stereotypes, he cannot claim those problems as his own — nor has he lived the life of a black American.”

Then, by Crouch’s argument, no white politician of ANY party denomination can be claimed by a non-white as “one of us.” Crouch has made a career of this type of divisive rhetoric, though lately, his focus has been attacking the realm of hip-hop music.

Then, by Crouch’s argument, no white politician of ANY party denomination can be claimed by a non-white as “one of us.”

As usual, Cobra, you completely miss the point about everything. (Although the humor of you complaining about “divisiveness” is not to be missed.)

That’s not Crouch’s argument at all. What he’s saying is that “one of us” can’t be defined by the amount of melanin in one’s skin.

By YOUR definition — the racial one — a white politician can’t be claimed as “one of us” by a non-white. By a definition which focuses on anything other than race — such as shared experiences — of course he can be. Crouch’s argument is that Obama doesn’t have shared experiences with most American blacks; he merely looks similar. That’s not a legitimate “us” category.

“Us” could be defined as environmentalists, or lawyers, or Dodgers fans, or Americans — in which case Obama, or any ‘white’, could be described as “one of us” by a non-white.

>>>”As usual, Cobra, you completely miss the point about everything. (Although the humor of you complaining about “divisiveness” is not to be missed.)”

At least I know I can bring a smile to your face, David.

David writes:

>>>”That’s not Crouch’s argument at all. What he’s saying is that “one of us” can’t be defined by the amount of melanin in one’s skin.”

That’s not what I perceive Crouch’s argument to be, because of the rationale he presents:

>>>”After all, Obama’s mother is of white U.S. stock. His father is a black Kenyan. Other than color, Obama did not — does not — share a heritage with the majority of black Americans, who are descendants of plantation slaves.”

By lumping in the “white U.S. stock” mother and Kenyan father, Crouch wants to give the impression that Obama is unique, with a brief throway line about similiar skin color. On the genetic level, however…

>>>”The new wave of genealogical testing also has reopened one of America’s ugliest wounds by confirming with science what historians have contended for generations: In slavery times and beyond, large numbers of black women were impregnated by white slave owners or other white men in positions of power.

About 30% of black Americans who take DNA tests to determine their African lineage prove to be descended from Europeans on their father’s side, says Rick Kittles, scientific director of African Ancestry, a Washington, D.C., company that began offering the tests in 2003. Almost all black Americans whom Kittles has tested descended from African women, he says.”